I question that the IAAF allows pacers with regards to World Records. These boys ran the 2011 Boston completely independent of pacers. I also question the criteria related to point to point courses (the 1/2 distance rule as well).
The thing that I have always liked about running races is that the clock does not lie especially now that we have computer aided timing technology. In so many sports, the outcome is determined by referees, and we all know that referees can make bad calls. No referees in running races.
The IAAF or whoever can try to say that 2:03:02 at Boston is not a World Record, but the fact is that runners themselves know that the new standard is 2:03:02 and not what the IAAF says is the new standard. Since the clock has no bias, deep down inside we all know what the new standard is irregardless of what the IAAF says.
These WR course criteria have only existed since 2004, and 7 years is not a very long time for the validity of the criteria to be tested. We all have a right to question the validity of rules. It was not that long ago that the "rules" prohibited women from running in certain marathons. And, there are other "rules" which have been questioned and adjusted for lack of validity.
Actually, the IAAF should be gratefull to the Boston Athletic Association for even giving the IAAF the courtesy of asking for their blessing. The Boston Marathon has stood the test of time, and I certainly would hope that the BAA would never change the Boston Marathon course from Hopkinton to Copley Square to suit the IAAF World Record criteria because to do so would completely ruin the charm and integrity of the Boston Marathon.
Post a reply on the Bulletin Board